The following post comes about as a result of the research and work put in by Auldheid.
He has drafted the submission to FIFA detailed below after closely looking at their rules, and taking on board the points contained in the Glasnost “Golden Rule” blog. TSFM has attached the blog’s name to the report since the overwhelming – but not unanimous – view of our readership is that the SFA and the SPL have again gotten themselves into an almighty and embarrassingly amateur fankle over this issue.
We believe that tens of thousands of football fans will be lost to the game if the outcome of the LNS enquiry is not perceived to be commensurate with the scope and extent of the rule breaking that LNS found had taken place. In view of this, we believe that we have to do what we can to explore all possibilities for justice for those who love the game so much and yet are utterly disillusioned by recent events.
LNS is not being questioned here. He has found that RFC were guilty as charged by the SPL.
What is being questioned is the SFA’s crucial – and seemingly conflicted – role in the LNS enquiry, as is the effectiveness of LNS’s recommended sanction as either a deterrent or an upholder of sporting integrity.
It came to our notice last week that FIFA have created a web site at
https://www.bkms-system.net/bkwebanon/report/clientInfo?cin=6fifa61&language=eng
that tells us that FIFA have implemented a regulatory framework which is intended to ensure that all statutory rules, rules of conduct and internal guidelines of FIFA are respected and complied with.
In support of that regulatory framework FIFA have set up the above site as a reporting mechanism by means of which inappropriate behaviour and infringements of the pertinent regulations may be reported.
FIFA say that their jurisdiction encompasses misconduct that (1) relates to match manipulation; (2) occurs in or affects more than one confederation, so that it cannot adequately be addressed by a single confederation; or (3) would ordinarily be addressed by a confederation or association, but, under the particular facts at issue, has not been or is unlikely to be dealt with appropriately at that level.
Discussions arising from the previous blog on TSFM, “Gilt Edged Justice”, which was published after Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) ruled on the registration of Rangers players who had contractual side letters that were not disclosed to the SFA as part of their registration, suggest that there may be possible unfortunate consequences for football arising from the evidence presented by the SFA to the LNS enquiry that informed its findings on registration and consequent eligibility. There is also a question of the propriety of the SFA providing evidence on an issue which could have had a negative impact on them had it been found that they had failed to carrying out their registration duties with due rigour over a period of ten years when the existence of EBTs was known to officials within the SFA.
On the basis that the LNS findings require that registration rules be clarified by FIFA and rewritten globally if necessary to remove any ambiguity and under clause 3 above, this appears to be an issue that the FIFA should examine and that the SFA cannot address.
The following report has therefore been submitted by TSFM on behalf of its readers to FIFA drawing on the content and debate following the “Gilt Edged Justice” blog in respect of the possible footballing consequences of the LNS enquiry.
The hope is that by speaking for so many supporters, FIFA will give the TSFM submission some weight, but individuals are free of course to make their own points in their own way. We await acknowledgement of the submission.
The report Submitted to FIFA is as follows;
This report was prepared on behalf of the 10,000-strong readership of The Scottish Football Monitor at http://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/
It is our belief that FIFA general rules of conduct were breached by the SFA and their employees in both creating and then advising The Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) enquiry into the non disclosure of full payment information to the Scottish Football Association (SFA) by Rangers F.C during a period of player registration over 10 years from 2000.We believe that although the issue has been addressed by the SFA the particular facts at issue suggest that it has not been dealt with appropriately and we therefore ask FIFA to investigate. The facts at issue are that the process and advice given failed to uphold sporting integrity, and that a conflict of interest was at play.
We believe the advice provided and the enquiry set up, where SFA both advised and is the appellant body, breaches not only the integrity the registration rules were intended to uphold, but also totally undermines the integrity of the SFA in breach of General Conduct rules 1, 2 and 4. (See below.)
1. Firstly we believe that the advice supplied to LNS that an incorrectly registered player was eligible to play as long as the registration was accepted by the SFA however unwittingly, undermines the intent of the SPL/SFA rules on player registration and so undermines the integrity of football in three ways.
• It incentivises clubs to apply for a player to be registered even if they know that the conditions of registration are not satisfied, in the hope that the application will somehow ‘slip through the net’ and be granted anyway (in which case it will be valid until revoked).
• A club which discovers that it has made an error in its application is incentivized to say nothing and to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’ – because it would be in a better position by not confessing its mistake.
• And most importantly, it incentivises fraud. By deliberately concealing relevant information, a club can ensure that a player who does not satisfy the registration conditions is treated as being eligible – and therefore allowed to play – for as long as a period as possible (potentially his entire spell with the club). Then, if the club is no longer around when the deception is finally discovered, imposing meaningful sanctions may be impossible.
2. Secondly we believe the process followed was inappropriate due to a Conflict of Interest. Had the LNS enquiry not ruled on the basis of advice supplied by The SFA, they and those persons advising the LNS enquiry, could have been subjected to censure and the SFA to potential compensation claims had LNS found that the players were indeed ineligible to play and results then been annulled as was SFA practice when an ineligible player played.
3. Finally we contend that a law should not be applied according to its literal meaning if to do so would lead to an absurdity or a manifest injustice or in this case loss of football integrity.
See http://glasnostandapairofstrikers.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/gilt-edged-justice/4. We therefore ask FIFA to investigate both the process used and advice given to Lord Nimmo Smith to satisfy themselves that FIFA’s intentions with regard to upholding the integrity of football under FIFA rules have not been seriously damaged by the LNS findings and also to reassure Scottish football supporters that the integrity of our game has not been sacrificed by the very authority in whose care it has been placed to promote the short term cause of commercialism to the games long term detriment.
General Rules of Conduct (These are taken from the FIFA web site itself and can be found as part of completing the submission process)
1. Persons bound by this Code are expected to be aware of the importance of their duties and concomitant obligations and responsibilities.
2. Persons bound by this Code are obliged to respect all applicable laws and regulations as well as FIFA’s regulatory framework to the extent applicable to them.
3. N/A
4. Persons bound by this Code may not abuse their position in any way, especially to take advantage of their position for private aims or gains.
Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie) says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 00:31
In their present state I think Rangers would be more likely to be relegated from the SPL never mind being in a position to place at risk Celtic’s CL income.
—————————————–
Should Rangers occupy a relegation place a couple of months before the end of a season in the top division, expect the authorities and media to start pressing the urgent case for a reconstruction of Scottish football, for the good of the game and to preserve TV revenues. Item 1 of which would be an enlarged top division, with no relegation for that season.
Neepheid @ 08:46
The agenda of the MSM in Scotland is varied.
eg. Newspapers want to sell more copy and receive more clicks.
To this end they largely feature Rangers and Celtic in their Sports sections (and any where else if they can) and over the last couple of years Rangers have dominated for obvious reasons.
Both clubs attempt to control output as best they can, but this is where there is an important difference wrt motive.
There are of occasion splits and political difficulties, such as certain issues with the Green Brigade but over the piece, Celtic do so for the clubs interests which are largely unified with their support.
Rangers also seek to influence output but in favour of the owner/custodian rather than the on-going interests of the club and it´s support.
At the same time they spin whatever it is to the fans in such a way that it is generally supported from the stands.
Mediahouse (remit) are no friends of the Rangers support.
So the long-game will see the influence that Rangers have in the media actually work against the club and it´s support but help those upstairs have their way.
Add that to the influence that Celtic bring to bear in the media and you have a long-term media double whammy.
Spiers on Sportsound when discussing the notion that there should be a level playing field,and that all clubs including T’Rangers should be treated equally stated that ‘its not equal’ given the lure of TV,TRFC pulling power etc etc
It is bloody equal! All clubs should be treated the same and the very fact that one club has been danced around is what makes us all turn off Scottish football administration.
And all this shapeshifting, duplicitous manoeuvring is utterly unacceptable.
Stuart Cosgrove’s anger sums up the frustration we all have about this issue.
Another point ,no matter how Graham Spiers dresses it,he wants Rangers in the poxy ,crappy invitational SFL 2.
Invitational? what an absurd notion.
And no,on merit,TRFC would not in any shape or form justify an invitation to an SPL 2.
Rantin
Spiers should be largely ignored as he has simply never known his chosen subject very well.
Only in Scotland could he have got away with it.
If it were to be an invititational SPL2 then by definition, any club whatever their League position would be eligible.
The irony is that if it were to happen then the SPL (Celtic being the most powerful voice within) would have to put the idea forward.
With that in mind your rant should perhaps be directed elsewhere.
SPL 2 Invitational?
What are we playing in ,an American golf tournament?
Awa ye go Greenock Jack
Long time reader of TSFM, first time poster.
I find all the talk about Rangers/The Rangers/Sevco (take your pick) all very boring at the moment.
What I’d be more concerned with is the current SPL table.
No disrespect to the likes of Inverness/Ross County/St. Johnstone etc, who have all done brilliantly this season, but having four of our so-called ‘bigger’ teams in the bottom six is a bit worrying for me.
Rantin
Mr.Nicklaus to you !
Fair enough Greenock.
Nothing personal,and I’m sure you have a point re Mr Spiers input but I just think it is utterly daft even considering the notion of an invitational SPL 2.
Plain simple ,daft!
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 09:07
Should Rangers occupy a relegation place a couple of months before the end of a season in the top division, expect the authorities and media to start pressing the urgent case for a reconstruction of Scottish football, for the good of the game and to preserve TV revenues. Item 1 of which would be an enlarged top division, with no relegation for that season.
————————-
I think the reality of the situation is that Rangers, in any form will never be fighting a relegation battle as actions would be taken to prevent that before the situation actually arises. If nothing else, they would just spend money (even if they don’t have any) to ensure they have a team that can at least win enough games to ensure they stay above that zone. I am not a financial wizard so cannot actually comment on the numbers that indicate they could run out of money before the end of next season but I understand enough to know that with 50k fans every second week, they will always be in a position of strength compared to most other Scottish teams.
To me, this is the main issue for most people. They have run up unmanageable debts to secure championships and when the source of those monies dried up, they just packed their bags and left. They then turned up sometime later, different persons but with the same bags and just started again.
This has left a feeling of mistrust and a fear that if the situation arises where Rangers are in some sort of trouble, either during the 90 minutes, during the course of a season, during an administration process, during liquidation, during a rebirth, during a climb through the leagues, during a closely fought championship…. They will be given a helping hand.
This could be a totally irrational fear but its existence cannot be denied. The football authorities, the trustees of our game, are there to protect and assure the clubs and fans. They are supported by a set of mutually agreed rules and regulations put in place to make the game transparent and fair, by not applying those rules, they are actually the ones who have created the fear and lack of trust.
I would love to find time to finish a piece I started writing about how to move on after “Bluegate”, I am sure it would help me find some direction, something we all could do with due to the lack of a trustworthy leadership within the game in Scotland.
Rantin
I just think it is utterly daft even considering the notion of an invitational SPL 2.
——————————————————————
Well it´s the SPL you have to direct your thought´s towards, Spier´s is an irrelevence and Rangers are currently an SFL club.
LETS BE POSITIVE…………Why might Sevco being given a foot up the leagues be good for the game as a whole?
Will it bring in a league sponsor
Will it bring in a cup sponsor
Will they bring through their own youth and lead to an improvement in national team
Will they bring an improved TV deal
Will they bring bigger away supports to other clubs grounds (and will that offset any increase in prize money they can expect to receive)
What are the financial advantages of bringing them up?
(other than being a financial advantage to Sevco themselves – as that would apply to any club brought up)
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 10:15
—————————————-
Let’s be rational. Any additional monies that the fast-tracking of Rangers would bring to the game would be negated by the downfall in gate revenue at every other club in the league.
It would merely confirm that most of what has happened in the past two years has been stage managed to get rid of their debt mountain whilst at the same time allowing them to remain in the league set-up.
I think that most fans are now of the opinion that the game is totally corrupt both here and elsewhere. It won’t take much to turn us off completely.
Quote from the AIM Market website on The Rangers first trophy win…
Rangers International Football Club plc (AIM: RFC), the holding company for the Scottish football club ‘Rangers’, is pleased to announce that is has won the Scottish Football League third-division championship. The title was secured at the weekend when, more than a month before the completion of the season, Rangers moved 22 points clear of their closest rivals and cannot now be overtaken.
This latest honour for Rangers FC, the most successful club in Scotland, is the first significant step on the Club’s journey back to the top of football.
Couple of inaccuracies in there I think.
tomtomaswell says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 10:45
————————–
Tomtomaswell, that is not a positive post in the spirit of my questions.
Seriously, what is the financial benefit to the GAME AS A WHOLE of having Sevco fast tracked up.
I’ve yet to see/hear one convincing argument on WHY they should be given preferential treatment.
So, come on, thinking caps on, what are the benefits (i’ll even accept imagined/incorrect benefits if it prompts debate!)
We have reached a situation where the Scottish media, both written and broadcast feel that it is OK to say that any sense of fair play or equality should simply be set aside because of financial considerations.
It is apparently absolutely fine to ignore rules and to give one club special treatment on the basis that, in short, that club needs the money they will get by playing in a higher league. Clearly that is not the case in relation to other clubs who have experienced financial difficulties, for whatever reason. Where were the calls to keep Dunfermline in the SPL because they needed the money.
That is totally unacceptable. Fairness and equal treatment must come first, and if in doing that we see the amount of money in Scottish football drop then so be it. I would rather have a fair, if financially smaller, game than what they seek to achieve through propaganda and outright lies.
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 09:49
Nothing personal,and I’m sure you have a point re Mr Spiers input but I just think it is utterly daft even considering the notion of an invitational SPL 2.
Plain simple ,daft!
====================
Hang on! We’re talking Scottish football here. The word “daft” just doesn’t exist for the people who administer the game. They will go ahead with anything, no matter how daft it might seem to us, in the foolish belief that there is more money in it.
I’ve said before that the ultimate “vision” that they are chasing is the American franchise model, no promotion or relegation, ten franchises involving mergers all round, and all the rest can go to hell in a corned beef tin. An “invitational” is just a first big step towards their vision, so don’t think it won’t happen.
It’s not what the fans want, it will kill the game totally, but that’s the quality of leadership we have. There is a total disconnect between what the authorities think is best for the game, and what the fans, who know a lot more about the game, actually want. Maybe that is the fundamental problem in Scottish football.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 10:53
1 0 Rate This
tomtomaswell says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 10:45
————————–
Tomtomaswell, that is not a positive post in the spirit of my questions.
Seriously, what is the financial benefit to the GAME AS A WHOLE of having Sevco fast tracked up.
I’ve yet to see/hear one convincing argument on WHY they should be given preferential treatment.
So, come on, thinking caps on, what are the benefits (i’ll even accept imagined/incorrect benefits if it prompts debate!)
===================
Cue rolls of tumbleweed 😀
Re Equality.
What T’Rangers and their supporters fail to acknowledge is that is takes two teams to make a game and a set of teams to make a league or cup competition.
On the field of sporting endeavour when the whistle blows or the gun goes of everything should be equal. It is how individuals and teams perform on the day that matters, not how much money you have in the bank nor how big your support is. If a part time team’s star player misses the game because he has to work overtime then tough. If a full time team loses three players to a stomach bug then tough.
You go out with what you have on that day and do your best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cdc13CU9Fc
Also, IF Sevco are given a hand up……would it be unreasonable for, say, Celtic to have a rule added that would prevent them from ever being relegated?
They are a big team, and surely the league needs a strong Celtic.
So why not?
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 10:15
LETS BE POSITIVE…………Why might Sevco being given a foot up the leagues be good for the game as a whole?
===========
All your potential points relate to money. I simply don’t care how much money would be brought in by allowing one club to leapfrog over others, because once that is done, you don’t have a game any more. What you have is just another part of the entertainment industry. At that point I might as well spend quality time with Mrs Neepheid watching “strictly” on the telly, as waste my money watching a rigged football league. The sporting integrity will be the same in both cases, but one costs me nothing, the other a lot of money.
So it is nothing to me whether TRFC in the top flight next season brings big bags of cash to the other clubs or not. Because if they get any sort of leg up, I will never, ever, under any circumstances watch Scottish football again. Maybe that’s not being positive- but that’s how it is.
neepheid
there is simply no case to be made on giving them a foot up based on sporting merit or the integrity of the game
that is why all my points relate to the financial benefits of them being brought in.
if someone can show me one actual financial benefit to the game as a whole, then we can have a debate about how that financial benefit should be given a priority over the integrity of the game
but as it stands right now, there is absolutely no grounds whatsoever to justify their fast tracking.
I don’t get the anger being vented at Speirs.
Surely in the case of SPL2 – any notion of an invitation based on purely sporting merit isn’t a priority? Should any restructuring happen along more traditional lines then yes, Rangers inclusion above others would be totally wrong. If we are talking SPL2 then it would be ridiculous not to invite Rangers from a business point of view – they bring attention, crowds and money to the table.
Picking a new 12 is a political game and teams have different weightings that would influence their selection. Some will be hard graft, some will be because of a fan base, maybe geography – hell, some may even be picked just for hard graft and reasons of merit.
But there is no point pleading the sporting integrity card with a process that isn’t based on them. Should the new 12 simply be the 12 below Dundee? Yes of course…in a perfect world.
There has to be a point when people on this forum stop villifying others for the slightest thing when they are actually make a very straightforward point. Cosgrove, who I think is great, wasn’t wrong in his argument on Saturday but he was simply arguing a different point.
The more improtant point though is this – have the SPL engineered this whole situation to appear forced into proposing SPL2? This option then gives them the ‘wriggle room’ to put forward a legitimate case for Rangers reinstatement in the top divisions for the reasons I have stated above. If I was a business man in the game I have the sneaking suspicion that, with self-interest at heart, this was the outcome I would always have wanted. To do it under the cover of failed altruism is even better.
I also think it is illuminating that the principle that clubs should know what they are playing for at the start of any season no longer applies to Sevco when fast tracking is being considered.
Let’s be clear, when the media and the football authorities state that we need Rangers in the SPL due to financial considerations, this is not about what their travelling support bring to the table. They will still do that no matter what league they are in, all you are doing is stealing from Peter to give to Paul, the money will still be in the game.
The game will not die because Rangers are not in the top tier, it will die because too many clubs depend on revenue gained from sponsorship like SKY TV. Those sponsors want to see Rangers in the top tier to justify the outlay, it is that simple.
So if you want the game to survive, forget Rangers and ditch the sponsors. Let’s get back to watching football on a Saturday at 15:00hrs, let’s start living within our means and stop paying average players too much, let’s stop the negativity and start promoting our game.
Let’s ask these guys one simple question, one that requires a response without a long drawn out political explanation:
Q1: Do you believe that football in Scotland’s top tier should be run as a sport based on the principals of fair play and equality using a system of promotion and demotion based on achievements on the field of play?
Or….
Q2: Do you believe that football in Scotland’s top tier should be run as an entertainment franchise where the competing teams are handpicked based on a set criteria designed to give maximum exposure to sponsors?
Any media hounds out there willing to put that poll to the various Journalists, SPL, SFA, SFL CEO’s, Club CEO’s, Pundits etc…
madbhoy,
I think everyone answers YES to Q1, the reality of the situation is Q2.
The real question is how do you get to the situation you propose in Q1? Surely even the most ideological here understand that, as Cosgrove said, it would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas? To get to that promised land would mean a lot of pain for teams and chairmen. Sometimes this whole thing isn’t as conspiratorial as some believe – it’s a lot more petty and selfish and sometimes, sadly, it’s about a whole system and leagues which are unable to yet face it’s future as a footballing backwater.
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:26
I don’t get the anger being vented at Speirs.
Surely in the case of SPL2 – any notion of an invitation based on purely sporting merit isn’t a priority? Should any restructuring happen along more traditional lines then yes, Rangers inclusion above others would be totally wrong. If we are talking SPL2 then it would be ridiculous not to invite Rangers from a business point of view – they bring attention, crowds and money to the table.
—————————————-
And that is exactly the problem, it is totally ridiculous to consider a restructured business where you exclude a possible 50k customers every week. You would have to be crazy!
My problem is that I didn’t grow up watching a business and I don’t want my son to grow up with that, I want him to watch a sport knowing it is not engineered to end a specific way. I have no problem with franchised entertained, I just don’t want football to go down that road. If the majority of Scots want that then fine, we can design a system that supports that and the fans who want to take part can do so, I will not. When there is too much influence from sponsors, the influence can corrupt, simple!
If you create any league set up which ‘invites’ other teams on a set of criteria which does not focus on sporting ability but which considers other factors such as financial pulling power and ‘the bums on seats ‘ argument then you can say goodbye to Professional football in Scotland.
The fans simply will not wear it.It is crass and it is wrong.
I certainly will not be remotely interested.
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:46
The real question is how do you get to the situation you propose in Q1? Surely even the most ideological here understand that, as Cosgrove said, it would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas? To get to that promised land would mean a lot of pain for teams and chairmen. Sometimes this whole thing isn’t as conspiratorial as some believe – it’s a lot more petty and selfish and sometimes, sadly, it’s about a whole system and leagues which are unable to yet face it’s future as a footballing backwater.
======================================
How do you get there – pretty simple
You don’t do it overnight!
Clubs have contracts – and expenses which they are tied to.
So any proposition to introduce “belt tightening” must come in from a date a few years out – to allow the clubs the chance to move those players/contracts on and reduce their cost base
Funnily enough, the sponsorship/TV deals we currently have are in place for a couple of years as well….so we let them run down
if the sponsors don’t want to renew – then fine, but at least the clubs have been planning for the loss of income.
So, the SFA/League have to set targets on cost reduction by a certain timeframe – and they need to put in harsh penalties for any club not in line with those cost reductions – such as relegation to the bottom tier – or even expulsion from the league altogether.
The turkeys will then not only VOTE for christmas, but will even set the table – otherwise they will be the turkey that is roasted!
Of course, this will mean a short – medium term decline in the product. The big unknown is, will the support stand by an honest league where teams are living within their means.
Just an alternative thought regarding longmiur calling for reconstruction next year. Mebey on this occasion he is supporting the lower league teams. If at the last meeting the reconstruction vote included the demand that the rangers go into the spl2 then all the clubs in sfl2 would miss out on money from rangers games. All the sfl1 teams want this through now cause they’ll get the gets money next season, also, if the sfl1 teams became spl2 teams would they still be under his remitt when all the bodies merge? Perhaps longmiur is actually listening to the teams that he works for, for a change. Probably not, but you never know……
madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:46
0 0 Rate This
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:26
I don’t get the anger being vented at Speirs.
Surely in the case of SPL2 – any notion of an invitation based on purely sporting merit isn’t a priority? Should any restructuring happen along more traditional lines then yes, Rangers inclusion above others would be totally wrong. If we are talking SPL2 then it would be ridiculous not to invite Rangers from a business point of view – they bring attention, crowds and money to the table.
—————————————-
And that is exactly the problem, it is totally ridiculous to consider a restructured business where you exclude a possible 50k customers every week. You would have to be crazy!
My problem is that I didn’t grow up watching a business and I don’t want my son to grow up with that, I want him to watch a sport knowing it is not engineered to end a specific way. I have no problem with franchised entertained, I just don’t want football to go down that road. If the majority of Scots want that then fine, we can design a system that supports that and the fans who want to take part can do so, I will not. When there is too much influence from sponsors, the influence can corrupt, simple!
=======================
Rangers don’t bring 50,000 customers to the game in general. The money from the 50,000 fans goes directly into RFC. The only revenue their fanbase generates is when they visit other grounds.
However let’s play the numbers game and accept that their 50,000 fans would be a boost to the game. What happens when there is not a successful RFC on the park? Do we think that the 50,000 will continue to turn up. If not, what do we do then. We will truly have reached a brick wall at that point with no possibility of turning back.
madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:37
Let’s be clear, when the media and the football authorities state that we need Rangers in the SPL due to financial considerations, this is not about what their travelling support bring to the table. They will still do that no matter what league they are in
No they won’t….
I guarantee TRFC support will boycott every ground of the current top league, with the exception of KFC….
I guarantee it.
There has been a lot of discussion on here, and elsewhere, of the favouritism shown to Rangers over the years, and the unprecedented level of help being given to The Rangers from the football authorities and their pet MSM. It has always been a difficult task, if not an impossible one, to ‘prove’ any form of favouritism in sport, it is usually only discussed in pubs anyway, and now online, but continues to be ignored by the media, resulting in it not getting a proper ‘airing’ nor being forensically examined. In short, however many examples we can all come up with of favouritism shown to a team from Ibrox we will never have anything with which to ‘prove’ it exists. Until now, that is.
As I said earlier, there has been an unprecedented level of help given to The Rangers in their short existence, far more than has ever been given before, even more than an aggregate of all such assistance to all others since Scottish football began. Even if we accept that ‘for the good of the game’ they had to be allowed into the league at some level, the efforts that were made to get them in at as high a level as possible were unbelievable, and the postponement of the signing ban beggared belief. Less obvious, but none-the-less disgusting, was the way Green, and McCoist, were allowed to say whatever they wanted in an effort to galvanise their supporters and ensure an income from season tickets higher than all but Celtic. The postponement of the signing ban has proven to be more significant than any of us could have imagined, as their form, even with the addition of SPL level players, has shown that they would have struggled had the ban stood.
But all this will pale into insignificance should TRFC be ‘invited’ into an SPL2, whatever machiavellian plots are hatched, and ‘proof positive’ will exist, for even the most blind to see, that an organisation that can so blatantly favour one member in this most shameful of ways, must also have been capable of the on-field favouritism we all knew, but couldn’t prove, existed previously.
Never before, in the field of human competition, has so much, been owed by one club, to so many (blazers, silks and spivs).
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:53
But isn’t that how the SPL started? A breakaway league, based on non-sporting criteria like stadia size and quality?
Yes, I know, its hardly been a resounding success. Trouble is, the various boards are desperately clinging onto nurse, for fear of something worse.
For me, the interesting thing is there looks like there is a deal to be to done, but Mr Longmuir appears to be sabotaging it.
I’m not a huge fan of this rushed re-org, but, a situation where we end up of with a breakaway SPL 2 would be the most sub-optimal solution imaginable, which is why it’s the one these numpties will end up engineering!
I agree Scapa.Lacking in leadership, factionalised and lacking in vision.
Bunchafearties.
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ScottishFA/Survey/survey%20pdf.pdf
SFA fans survey
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:26
You forgot to add an argument in favour of an ‘invitational’ SPL as opposed to one based solely on merit. Until now, invitational competitions have been money making pre-season beanos, of no real value other than to line the pockets of the competitors, and usually having oversized meaningless trophies presented to the winner. In other words, a bit of a joke. Do you think Speirs would have been so forcefully in favour of making Scottish football an even bigger joke than it has already become if The Rangers were already playing in the top league?
What you have to remember is that the whole idea of an ‘invitational’ SPL is to provide a vehicle to fast-track TRFC, and those proposing it are only interested in getting TRFC a leg up, with ‘financial benefits to the SPL’ a mere excuse, though some, no doubt, will be anticipating financial benefits/exclusives from Ibrox on a personal level, should it come to pass. ‘Succulent lamb, Graham?’
http://www.firmmagazine.com/news/3160/Exclusive%3A_SPL_confirm_Nimmo_Smith_inquiry_legal_costs_demand_from_Rangers_Sevco_.html
The Scottish Premier League has confirmed that it is seeking legal costs claimed to exceed £500,000 for the costs of the Lord Nimmo Smith inquiry from the legal entity that is Rangers.
The commission was set up to investigate the use of employee benefit trusts, and ultimately decided that the entity did not gain any unfair competitive advantage from the player payment arrangements, and that no sporting sanction or penalty should be imposed.
The entity was found to have contravened disclosure rules, and a fine of £250,000 was imposed. The SPL is now seeking the legal costs of the inquiry from the legal entity that is Rangers.
The claims came to light in a blog posting widely circulated via social media channels.
The Scottish Premier League confirmed to The Firm that the blog’s payment claim was correct, although it did not verify whether the amount claimed was accurate.
“There has been a routine application for costs given that the case was successfully pursued by the SPL,” a spokesman for the SPL told The Firm this afternoon.
The SPL set up the commission to investigate financial, contractual and other arrangements between Rangers and its players between November 2000 and May 2011.
Harper Macleod, who represent the SPL would not confirm or deny the claims. In a statement issued via its PR and Communications Manager, Harper Macleod told The Firm: “We do not comment on legal issues relating to any of our clients.”
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:46
madbhoy,
I think everyone answers YES to Q1, the reality of the situation is Q2.
————————————————————————-
This is the point, I don’t believe it is or has to be reality. If the top tier have a current TV deal which lasts for the next 4 years, that means we have 4 years to make the relevant changes. Some of the leagues don’t even have to consider that level of sponsorship so I believe it may not be as big a change for them as it is for the teams who have been used to the “free” money.
Yes it will mean pain, yes it will possibly lead to a change in the football landscape but it doesn’t have to mean the loss of some clubs, it is about some teams finding their place on the football league ladder and I believe that most of the teams with small fan bases have already found their level, it is the bigger teams that need to adjust more.
The problem is not and has never been dwindling attendances as they always have and always will go up and down, the problem for the last 20-30 years with some clubs is a massive increase in player salaries without an equivalent increase in revenue. If you cannot increase that revenue then you have to decrease the salary.
Some people will have you believe that in football you cannot account for a sudden decrease in fan numbers but that doesn’t stack up against the increased salaries and new players bought. Some clubs are buying new players when they already know that the revenue is going to be down from the previous year, why are they doing that? The season ticket money can be brought in before end of June, based on the money brought in you can make a judgement on your new player spending. If the numbers are down then you have to use players from the youth team. We have to make better use of the bonus system so that players can be rewarded for a good season without creating a burden for the next season which may turn out to be not as good, if my company makes money then we all get a bonus that year, if not, we don’t. If we lose money we have to look at where to cut costs for the next year. That is and should be the business part of football, simple accountancy.
bawsbustedanatha says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 12:14
—————————————————–
I disagree, as was proven with the 500 fans that turned up against Dundee Utd, fans want to see their team play. But as we are on the subject of guarantees, I will give you one. If Rangers are drawn away from home against Celtic in any competition over the next 12 months and beyond, they will sell every ticket offered to them.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 13:26
http://www.firmmagazine.com/news/3160/Exclusive%3A_SPL_confirm_Nimmo_Smith_inquiry_legal_costs_demand_from_Rangers_Sevco_.html
———————-
So, I take it as the case was against the “old co”, then the SPL believe the “new co” to be the same company, with history, titles etc? But yet, the fine was for the old co?
Any legal minds want to explain how the costs can fall to the club you all like to call Sevco?
Meant to add – this is a clear sign the SPL is completely and utterly skint. Another sign is the SPL’s rush to reconstruct – desperate for cash.
On the reconstruction, I don’t see why we can’t wait a year, so everybody knows what division they are in and what the plans will mean for each division well in advance. It is madness to a) change it this late & b) “promote” Rangers to a SPL 2 without them earning it.
Scottish football has many issues and Doncaster and Regan are two of the main one’s.
I listened with interest to Sportsound extra on Saturday afternoon. I have been thinking about the changing of the guard at the BBC – how it appears that we have shifted from Jim Traynor and the exploration of the circus of Scottish football discussion focusing on RFC and Celtic taking centre stage and now we are moving towards a more in-depth analysis of events and what these mean for the game.
In terms agenda setting, financial fair play in (Scottish) football now appears to be taking more of a centre stage. To my mind Stewart Cosgrove over the last 9 months or so has been playing a blinder in maintaining and shifting the direction of debate. He started with a thoughtful and passionate exploration of the issues surrounding the game, firstly focusing on sporting integrity – and now I get the sense that he is changing the debate towards clubs reaching a natural level of competition be living within their means.
I am wondering if we beginning to reach the end game, where financial fair play in the form of clubs competing within their means will dictate who survives and who falls by the way side.
Many of us thought that the prize was a FTTT decision that favoured HMRC and LNS stripping titles from RFC.
Perhaps the ultimate prize is financial fair play – where those rules are clear and consistently upheld by the SFA et al (no laughing at the back 🙂 ).
I am not convinced that Sevco as they are currently set up an operate could survive in terms of financial fair play. We are in April and they appear to be losing c£1m per month, and there is no sign that this Club has a financially viable business model, or that they will produce audited accounts.
#Charlotte18 appears to be fundamentally about financial fair play (or the complete absence of it depending on what angle you come from) – and thankfully Stewart appears to be generating some momentum behind this particularly murky episode of Scottish football.
Perhaps #Charlotte18, if that story is developed further in the public glare will provided continued momentum to reach a place where the governance of football in Scotland is placed on a firmer footing – where the shady practices of the past remain there.
A question ?
How many of us would be willing to accept the entry of The Rangers into SPL 2 as long as it was officially acknowledged that this was
1) A New Team & Company
2) The History started last year
3) They had new branding for badge & emblem
4) They may only use old logo and emblem for retro wear
5) Acknowledgement of wrong doing of previous club re signing and that titles held by previous club tainted.
TU for Yes
TD for No
I should have said if not an SPL 2 further up the leagues in SFL
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:53
Isn’t this almost how the Champion’s League places are determined anyway?
Small/underperforming leagues require their champions to pre-qualify, whereas richer/larger leagues get 3 places (although with a pre-qualification on 1 of those).
So the big leagues get richer and the small leagues (teams) get stifled/stiffed…
BriggsB
Given most of those on this board are supporters of SPL clubs is it not yourselves that hold sway on the mooted SPL2 invitional ?
SPL2 invitational, sorry !
hangerhead says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 14:12
0 0 i
Rate This
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:53
Isn’t this almost how the Champion’s League places are determined anyway?
Small/underperforming leagues require their champions to pre-qualify, whereas richer/larger leagues get 3 places (although with a pre-qualification on 1 of those).
So the big leagues get richer and the small leagues (teams) get stifled/stiffed…
—————————————————-
No it isn’t.
The allocation of places per national league is based on a co-efficient calculated from past performances of teams from those nations in the competition.
You can debate whether this is a self fulfilling prophecy and I agree it tends to make the strong stronger and stacks the odds against the wee nations, but it is actually based on sporting merit so not a valid comparison
allyjambo says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 12:17
………………………………..
Spot on AJ…the whole issue…to me any way…revolves around the moral question of…is it right to reward a club..any club who have shown industrial levels of dishonesty and deliberate avoidance of the rules to the detriment of all other clubs?
The attempt by certain MSM types to justify rewarding one particular club…because it MIGHT mean more money to others…whilst ignoring the moral issue of how they arrived at where they are in the first place..is an indication that Scottish football is finished…
Invitation is a polite get around for morally bankrupt!
We can therefore assume that relagation is no longer permitted for certain clubs…and we can also assume that certain clubs must have access to the money generated by European football…
If this leg up goes ahead then we can be certain that everything in Scottish football in the top division will be engineered to accomplish the above 2 assumptions…
In short….FIXED!
Imagine a certain club on the last day of the season needs to win to avoid relagation….with what we now know…would the SPL/SFA allow it to happen?…if your answer is no….then Scottish football is corrupt.
texaspedro says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 13:58
———————
simply enough….though incorrectly IMO…..the SPL are claiming costs against the “CLUB” and as Sevco are the current operators of the “CLUB” then they are liable for the bill.
Of course, this doesn’t really tie in with LNS issuing fine against OLDCO – but his reckoning was it was OLDCO and not Sevco who made these mistakes.
However, Sevco turned up to defend the action – and that is a current action.
But, the whole “CLUB” being operated by a company is a nonsense. Why the SPL framed the charges in such a way was a nonsense. They should have simply taken the action against RFC PLC (IL) and applied any sanction/punishment against them. This has nothing to do with Sevco
But I guess the SPL were looking for a way to get some money out of SOMEONE – so invented the Club/Operating company myth.
well, it’s gone wrong and the SPL are fecked and will miss out on any meaningful punishment/fiscal penalty and it’s just caused bad feeling and cost money.
Maybe they should stop thinking about money first and focus on what is right and proper in a sporting context – they would then have got a meaningful result and we could all have moved on.
madbhoy24941 says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 13:44
500, perhaps. Looked less to me.
Mr. Dhinny,(I think that’s how it’s spelt), of the RST has publicly stated a boycott is on the agenda for TRFC’s return to the top flight. That’s fact.
500 x £25 = £12500.
How much do you think the Police and Stewards cost for this game, assuming a full travelling support which didn’t travel, compared to a game against, say, St. Johnstone with their known, small travelling support?
I’d suggest DU lost out on this.
I still can’t see why these clubs need TRFC.
texaspedro says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 14:02
4 1 Rate This
Meant to add – this is a clear sign the SPL is completely and utterly skint. Another sign is the SPL’s rush to reconstruct – desperate for cash.
On the reconstruction, I don’t see why we can’t wait a year, so everybody knows what division they are in and what the plans will mean for each division well in advance. It is madness to a) change it this late & b) “promote” Rangers to a SPL 2 without them earning it.
Scottish football has many issues and Doncaster and Regan are two of the main one’s.
—————————————-
How so?
they are just reclaiming expenses they believe they are entitled to.
I don’t see how reconstruction will put any more money in the pockets of teh SPL or SPL clubs – all reconstruction will do is redistribute how they share the pot out.
However, i agree, there is no rush to implement change for next season or invite sevco into the second tier of whatever scottish football looks like next year.
Why did you leave Longmuir and Ogilvie off your list of “many issues?”
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 14:16
Never suggested that we hold sway over matters, it was no more than a bit of trying to gauge opinion and feelings of those on the blog, no more no less. A TU would have sufficed from you:)
From Daily Record today.
ALLY McCOIST last night insisted Rangers’ Third Division title win is the 55th in the club’s history.
And not the first championship for the newco Rangers formed after liquidation last summer.
Rival fans have insisted Sevco, the business concern that bought Rangers’ assets after the Ibrox club went into liquidation and then changed its name to The Rangers Football Club Limited last year, started a new club.
8888
And those fans maintain Rangers’ title triumph is the first in the new concern’s history.
But McCoist said yesterday: “It’s definitely title 55. I don’t think there’s any doubt about that.
—————————————————————————————————————–
I for one doubt that this is true.
Liquidation put an end to the club that won 54 titles. This is a new club with now one league title to their name.
This issue has got to be addressed as the HISTORY of a club is the most passionate thing to the fans.
They seemed to have faired well in the FTT (appeal in progress as we speak). LNS inquiry flawed but again favoured them.
Are we just to somehow agree that Sevco, Rangers (IA), Rangers (IL) and The Rangers International are the team that has won 54 titles??
We are not the SMSM we say it as it is they are a new club which has won it’s first title and are to be congratulated on that. FACT.
texaspedro says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 13:58
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 13:26
http://www.firmmagazine.com/news/3160/Exclusive%3A_SPL_confirm_Nimmo_Smith_inquiry_legal_costs_demand_from_Rangers_Sevco_.html
———————-
So, I take it as the case was against the “old co”, then the SPL believe the “new co” to be the same company, with history, titles etc? But yet, the fine was for the old co?
Any legal minds want to explain how the costs can fall to the club you all like to call Sevco?
————————————–
Presumably if the costs are against oldco, they will be sought from the creditors pot?
Briggs
Never suggested that we hold sway over matters, it was no more than a bit of trying to gauge opinion and feelings of those on the blog, no more no less.
—————————————————————————————
You misunderstood my post.
The validity or not of your poll isn´t what I was getting at.
What I was saying is that the majority of this messageboard support SPL clubs and those clubs would have to vote in favour of any SPL2 by invitation that were to be proposed.
Therefore, collectively you could hold sway if there was sufficient determination and organisation to do so.
The integrity of the sport in Scotland – that the position held in a hierarchy of clubs is dependent on achievement and progression through attainment on field – cannot be remade once it is broken.
If SPL2 is set up and awards a place by invitation, then the game of association football in Scotland is over.
Contrast this with other examples of ‘artificial’ attainment in sport and what can be done about it…
If there are drugs cheats – they can be excluded and punished, but ‘the game’ continues.
If there is corruption in officialdom – the whistle can be blown, and action taken to throw out the corrupt, but ‘the game’ continues.
If participant clubs are overspending and running up unsustainable debt – FFP rules can be introduced, but ‘the game’ continues.
But with the set up of an ‘invitation’ league – the integrity ends. It cannot be started again like a single club that fell on hard times.
Its all over.
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:26
…
And that is exactly the problem, it is totally ridiculous to consider a restructured business where you exclude a possible 50k customers every week. You would have to be crazy!My problem is that I didn’t grow up watching a business and I don’t want my son to grow up with that, I want him to watch a sport…
================
It would seem that the football administrations of the SPL, SFL & the SFA believe they are managing businesses first and foremost. However, the paying customers believe they are – or should be – supporting a sport.
Like many, I naively believed that over the last year or so the SFA would ultimately stand up for sporting integrity whenever the SPL/SFL tried to overstep the mark wrt TRFC. We now know exactly where the SFA ranks sporting integrity: a distant second to commercial targets.
And as amazing as it is, we are still lumbered with the same key personnel at the SFA/SPL/SFL –and their approach will not change significantly. So, IMO, an invitational league is a ‘must’ to guarantee that TRFC return to the top flight ASAP. There is simply too much risk to entrust McCoist – or anyone else – with achieving consecutive league promotions.
And following an invitation to TRFC, [to the top flight directly ?], the next logical step is to ensure that neither TRFC nor CFC are allowed to be relegated. Maybe the administrations would wait until this was a possibility, [e.g. in TRFC ‘s first season in the top league?], before amending the rules or having yet another restructuring.
But by that point a lot more fans will be totally disillusioned, and any pretence of supporting a sport will have been fully exposed as a sham.
The football administrators – and the clubs themselves – are still not listening to their customers.
Yet if the SFA/SPL/FL genuinely believe that having TRFC back in the top league ASAP is for the benefit of Scottish football, they they have to substantiate that in an open and transparent manner – with compelling facts and figures and forecasts to support their view.
If the administrators cannot – or will not – share this information with the fans, then why should anyone believe them or trust them with the future of the Scottish game?
IMO, the SFA/SPL/SFL are consistently misreading the public mood.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 14:58
texaspedro says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 14:02
4 1 Rate This
How so?
they are just reclaiming expenses they believe they are entitled to.
I don’t see how reconstruction will put any more money in the pockets of teh SPL or SPL clubs – all reconstruction will do is redistribute how they share the pot out.
However, i agree, there is no rush to implement change for next season or invite sevco into the second tier of whatever scottish football looks like next year.
Why did you leave Longmuir and Ogilvie off your list of “many issues?”
————————-
Ok, better to say SPL/SFL/SFA are part of the many issues as opposed to Regan and Doncaster – although I still think they are clueless.
As for why it signals they are skint – they are clearly trying to recoup expenses that, hopefully we can all agree, Rangers/Sevco should not be paying. If you look at it, it is not correct in anyway – there is no harm in trying from their point of view but my opinion is they are doing it for a much needed cash input.
Very much looking forward to the East Coast Super League(bottom 6)starring Aberdeen,Dundee Utd,Hearts,Hibs,Dundee and err St Mirren 😀
StevieBC says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 16:25
gazpops says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 11:26
…
And that is exactly the problem, it is totally ridiculous to consider a restructured business where you exclude a possible 50k customers every week. You would have to be crazy!My problem is that I didn’t grow up watching a business and I don’t want my son to grow up with that, I want him to watch a sport…
================
It would seem that the football administrations of the SPL, SFL & the SFA believe they are managing businesses first and foremost. However, the paying customers believe they are – or should be – supporting a sport.
————————————
Football is business now, whether we like it or not. A very lucrative business at that if your lucky. The issue all fans have here is the balance between doing the correct thing from a sporting perspective and balancing that with a club/association that can invest the way many fans expect.
The only way, in my opinion, you can take business out of it is if all fans and clubs accept that we need to hit the reset button – that would mean acceptance that clubs cannot pay the wages they currently do, reducing the quality and standard (well, in theory!) and seeing all good Scottish talent go south of the border to earn a living. Acceptance, if you will, that we are level with the league of Ireland/Wales.
What comes with that is massive downsizing of clubs, loss of jobs, almost acceptance of amateur status – in this bleak theory I suggest. Are people willing to see that to keep “business” out the equation?
There is of course a much brighter theory that if you take business out of it we will all prosper, but that is too happy a thought.
i am not sure if Sevco should or should NOT be paying the legal bills
what happens in other independent tribunals – if a club loses, do they NORMALLY have to pay the bill – if so, same should apply here.
If it is normal practice….RANGERS should pay that bill – so, are sevco rangers or are they not?
you tell me
valentinesclown says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 15:13
…………………………………….
You must understand….Ally is desperate for the club he played for and managed to continue to exist…
By accepting it doesn’t exist where does that leave Ally and the 50k punters who are willing to shell out £40 – £50 a month towards Charlies leaving doo?
It leaves them without a club…yes some may turn to junior football…some to English football…some may even decide to spend their cash at another SPL or SFL club….but the majority will leave Scottish football…because they will no longer have the vehicle they use for their baggage…so as long as they need that vehicle…then you can expect them to be a bare faced liar in their persuit of that emotional comfort it provides them…
To accept the club is deid is to accept in some sort of battle of superiority contest they have lost…
On another point…if it is the same club…why did Charlie say he bought the history…why would the same club have to buy it’s own history from itself? that statement alone tells everyone the club is deid…the SEVCO fans within the MSM will not challenge this…non SEVCO fans are given very little exposure to air this….that is why it was refreshing to hear Tam Cowan a couple of weeks back respond to a comment from McCoist that his previous club went bust, they no longer existed..
All we can do is reinforce the FACT the club has been liquidated and no longer exists every time they say it does…this is a new club…
If it is important enough for them to LIE…it is important enough for us to state the truth!
Quote:
Lets clear something’s up regarding claims the SFA, UEFA and ECA recognise The Rangers as the same club as Rangers.
1) The SFA did not carry forward the cup byes in to the new club. Airdrie United use Clydebank’s SFA membership but are considered a new club. A football association membership is not a football club and SFA and UEFA articles make that clear.
2) UEFA confirmed in an email to STV that the transfer of a membership between two companies is regarded as in ‘interruption of membership’ and that the registration of that membership is reset as a result of this. Resultantly UEFA do not recognise any continuation and The Rangers do not qualify for a UEFA license until they have been registered with the SFA for three consecutive years. Effectively the history is wiped out.
3) ECA terminated Rangers membership and issued a new associate membership to The Rangers.
4) Lord Nimmo Smith’s view is nothing more than an opinion and there are plenty of more specialised expert sports lawyers who also serve as judges at CAS who will tell you that The Rangers is a new football club established in 2012.
5) Duff and Phelps report says Charles Green bought the assets of Rangers FC not the club.
The reality is that green bought a brand name, a logo, a football stadium and a training ground. He did not buy a football club and he admits this himself when he tries to argue that he also bought ‘the history’ of Rangers F.C. Sadly for old Charles, you can’t buy history.
Just got round to reading the paper today, and actually laughed out loud at this quote from Mr McCoist:
“The one thing about our football club is that I honestly believe we have always tried to do the right thing. We have got a lot of things wrong but we have always tried to do the right thing.”
Rangers in “always trying to do the right thing” shockeroonie! 🙂
texaspedro
We live in increasingly strange and unpredictable times.
There will be a lot of changes to the way we live our lives in the coming years, never mind football.
People have a choice (if they are aware) whether to try and force the changes that society needs or be trampled on. The seriousness of the situation is lost on the vast majority.
I saw in the RTC blog, how collective power could be harnessed into an effective political tool.
By accident, design or evolution it jump started the bandwagon that ultimately influenced the subsequent votes in Scottish football last summer.
I would like to see this repeated but on matters more important than football.
People should be aware of the power they have in a collective.
—————————————————————————————————–
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 16:41
……………………
If they are the same club…then yes they should…just as if they are the same club..then there is an outstanding tax bill and an outstanding list of creditors…owed millions!
Scottish football died the day Sevco got the conditional licence to play Brechin as Rangers whilst Rangers were still members of the SPL. We moved from football to utter delusion at that moment with no prospect of ever returning the game to a sport of any description. Everything since has been Walter Mitty stuff total fantasy built on delusion. Nothing in Scottish football has any validity or credibility. WWF it is and even less athleticism than shown in that charade.
The ba’ is well and truly bust. Deck chair rearranging and endless debate cannot remove the simple fact that tha SFA SPL and SFL speaking for all of the clubs in the game have destroyed its honesty as a sport and transferred it from that realm to the one of entertainment and not particularly interesting stuf either.
liveinhop says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 16:57
1 0 Rate This
————————-
you forgot to add that in the LNS hearing, Sevco’s own lawyers confirmed that the club ceased to exist – there was an argument about the date – June or August, but that it didn’t matter which as the charges happened before either date that the club ceased to exist
https://twitter.com/Eddiek62/status/304142837602217984/photo/1
Having returned from holiday a few days ago, and living in England, I have kind of lost the thread of what’s been happening recently – other than the continued attempt to benefit TRFC at the expense of (all) others. One thing I seem to sense, if I’ve picked it up right, is a hardening of Neil Doncaster’s stance towards TRFC. Unless he is involved with the ludicrous proposal (where did it actually come from?) for an invitational SPL, then his belligerent stand over reconstruction ie take it now or forget it, seems to fly in the face of Charles Green and his plans for TRFC and to marginalise Longmuir who clearly puts the continuation of a club called Rangers ahead of all other clubs in the SFL.
The SPL, and no doubt Doncaster is behind the move, or at least approves it, is now moving to recoup money from one of the Rangers for the cost of the inquiry. Regardless of which Rangers they charge, it is a clear indication to their fans that ‘Rangers’ were found guilty (something they, and their pet media, seem unable to grasp), otherwise they couldn’t be held responsible for the costs. But if he holds TRFC liable, successfully or not, then he, and the SPL, would appear to have had enough, done enough, and put up with enough for/from Charles Green and the Angry Mob! Perhaps the past year has been a bit of a learning curve for a man so clearly out of his depth a year ago and easily taken advantage of under pressure from more powerful people in the game and a Rangers biased media.
Unfortunately, in this long saga, we have learned that whatever stance is taken in public can soon disintegrate in private, and a new, opposite one take it’s place without any explanation. I can remember, not so long ago, it was announced, I’m sure by Longmuir, that whatever the outcome of reconstruction, TRFC would not benefit by being placed higher than their league position merits – and he’s clearly changed his tune, for, if successful in scuppering the reconstruction plans, he will open the door to this fanciful idea of an SPL2 with TRFC invited to join.
It will undoubtedly be too little too late, but if Doncaster can find the mettle to stand up to Green, and to those in football set on rocketing TRFC to the top table, Scottish football might yet be saved from it’s RFC/TRFC caused decline.
I have read in a few places that Rangers have just won a league title.
There are two senior leagues in Scorland. The Scottish Football League and the Scottish Premier League.
Which one is it people think they have won.
I would suggest they have won a division, and if anyone can claim to be the Scottish Football League champions then it will be whoever wins the top division of that particular league. Rangers have not just won a league title.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has confirmed that is
it investigating The Rangers Football Club over an advertising
campaign run this season.
The ASA has confirmed to The Drum that it has received 62
complaints over and radio and regional press advertising
campaign that began to run last year.
A spokesperson for the ASA, explained: “We have received 62
complaints about a radio and regional press ad for Rangers
Football Club. The complainants have challenged whether the
claim ‘Scotland’s most successful club’ is misleading, because
they believe that the current club was only formed in 2012.”
They added that a formal investigation in the adverts was now
underway.
The complaints follow the liquidation of Rangers Football Club
that took place last year. This led to formation of a new club
which entered the Third Division of Scottish football last
summer. That club, led by manager Ally McCoist, comfortably
won the division on Saturday, but now faces a wait to find out
which league they will compete in next year with the Scottish
football authorities yet to decide whether to proceed with
league reconstruction this summer.
At the time of writing, The Drum was awaiting comment from
Rangers on the ASA investigation.
http://m.thedrum.com/news/2013/04/02/rangers-advertising-campaign-being-investigated-asa-confirms
What financial benefit would Sevco(I refuse to call them that other name) bring to the game?
Err,em,hold on hold on,don’t tell me. Gies a hint. Nah sorry am strugglin’here.
angus1983 says:
Tuesday, April 2, 2013 at 16:58
18 0 Rate This
Just got round to reading the paper today, and actually laughed out loud at this quote from Mr McCoist:
“The one thing about our football club is that I honestly believe we have always tried to do the right thing. We have got a lot of things wrong but we have always tried to do the right thing.”
========================================================================
so knowingly shredding evidence of tax avoidance and illegally registered players,
. . . is
. . . always. . .doing the right thing
A slight change of tack.
If the Spanish refuse to identify the tennis players, football players, boxers, athletes, and others who cheated – and who, perhaps, are still benefitting from the cheating they engaged in with the help of Dr Fuentes – then I believe there should be a world-wide moratorium on Spanish sportsmen and women. This kind of state-sanctioned cheating went out with the GDR.
——-
Puerto trial ends, verdict due in six weeks
Reuters
tirsdag den 2. april 2013
The Spanish doctor on trial for allegedly running a doping ring in cycling made his final defence on Tuesday before the judge retired to consider her verdict which is due in around six weeks’ time.
Eufemiano Fuentes and four other defendants, including his sister Yolanda, have been appearing in a Madrid court since late January, nearly seven years after anabolic steroids, transfusion equipment and blood bags were seized as part of an investigation code-named “Operation Puerto”.
The proceedings have attracted international attention because some of Fuentes’s clients were successful professional riders, including American Tyler Hamilton who gave evidence in February.
Anti-doping authorities, who are represented in court, hope the trial will lead to evidence of wrongdoing by athletes in sports other than cycling being made available.
Fuentes, who denies doping, said in his opening testimony he also had clients in sports including football, tennis, athletics and boxing. He said last month he might be willing to name the clients whose blood was found in the seized bags.
As Spain’s current anti-doping legislation was not in force in 2006 when the police raids took place, the five are being tried for violating public health regulations.
“I don’t understand law and I am not a lawyer but during my 35-year professional career I have never harmed a patient’s health,” Fuentes told the court on Tuesday.
“The goal I pursue as a medical doctor is to protect health, not to damage it,” he added.
A court official said the judge would publish her verdict in around six weeks. She will also announce whether she will grant a World Anti-Doping Agency request for access to the blood bags.
Spain is hopeful the trial will help to dispel the impression that the nation is soft on doping and boost Madrid’s bid to win the right to host the 2020 Olympic Games.
The country is pushing through parliament anti-doping legislation which the government says will bring Spain into line with international norms.
Reuters
——